The Great Linguistic Transformation: A Once-in-500-Years Shift Brought by "Internet Language" ~ Novelist Tomomi Fujiwara

In her book "The Unbearable Lightness of 'Connecting' Online," published this January, Akutagawa Prize-winning author Tomomi Fujiwara pointed out that "net language," replacing "written language," is fundamentally altering human thought. She advocated for the courage to "disconnect." The potential harms of digitalization have been noted not only in Japan but also by experts in the United States. We asked Fujiwara to discuss the "shadow" side of digitalization from a novelist's perspective.
(Interviewer: Yuzo Ono, Director of Planning and Promotion, Digital Business Division, Dentsu Digital Inc.)

---

■ Copy-Paste-Filled "Internet Language" That Doesn't Become Collective Knowledge

──In your books, you propose "Internet Language" as a third category distinct from both "written language" and "spoken language." What prompted you to adopt this perspective?

Fujiwara: It started when I saw everyone using smartphones on the train and felt a distinct sense of disconnection. I sensed this disconnect wasn't merely about my own outdated phone usage.

──So it started with a visceral sense of discomfort. You write that "net language" is "largely devoid of reflective thought about the words it creates, or is quickly forgotten." Does that mean the language itself online lacks introspection or depth?

Fujiwara: Broadly speaking, yes. But the underlying premise is that language isn't autonomous; it changes heteronomously, responding to external circumstances. The most recent major shift was triggered by Gutenberg's movable type printing about 500 years ago. The next major shift is likely the internet. I believe contemporary society lacks the perspective that the internet itself is transforming language.

──"Internet Language" also points out that the boundary between "my words" and "others' words" is becoming blurred. Is this situation also due to the change in language itself?

Fujiwara: Language is fundamentally rooted in the individual—it expresses one's self or receives and understands others' expressions. Now, it has become a tool for "connecting." When connecting becomes the primary focus and self-expression becomes secondary, the barriers between individuals naturally lower. Furthermore, the tool of "copy-paste" lowers those barriers even more. 2005 was a turning point. At that time, the "Aneha Incident" occurred. Structural calculations shifted from handwritten to software, allowing complex computations to be easily performed within the black box of a computer. Around the same time, multiple universities uncovered cases of fabricated research papers. Computers were involved in all these incidents; words, digitized, were copied and pasted, and falsified. Eventually, an atmosphere emerged asking, "Why is it wrong to use the internet, this wisdom humanity created?" The sentiment that monopolizing "knowledge" was undesirable grew stronger.

──Indeed, the internet was originally founded on the concept of "collective intelligence" – the idea that everyone contributes their wisdom to create something good.

Fujiwara: Copied-and-pasted papers aren't collective intelligence; they're merely accumulations of data. They only become collective intelligence if analyzed and used to create something new. While collective intelligence is often discussed, its concrete form remains elusive—it's just a vague notion of interconnectedness.

──I think there's also a positive aspect to the lightness and speed of "internet communication," like instantly and widely delivering necessary information during emergencies or when needed.

Fujiwara: There is certainly the idea that it's good because we have real-world connections elsewhere, and the connections on the net exist on a different level. However, even if we claim to be making clear distinctions, the virtual and the real can easily become interchanged. The falsification of structural calculations showed how modifications in a digital virtual space could have major impacts on the real world, and recent cases of paper fraud using the internet have become real social problems. Areas where the internet and reality can't be separated are emerging, and reality might be eroded in our lives and society. I think we still don't know how to strike a balance there.

──You also wrote that reactions and thinking online tend to be "short-sighted" and "prone to run amok." Do you think the cause lies in "internet slang"?

Fujiwara: I believe "internet language" inherits the worst aspects of "spoken language." Personally, I've sent emails to people while drunk and regretted it many times (laughs). On the other hand, arguing via letter is difficult. Letters involve several physical hurdles: writing, affixing a stamp, looking up the address, and posting it. Online, such hurdles are almost nonexistent.

■ Language is fragmenting, the era of books is ending, and the landscape of society is changing

 

──You also wrote that printed words "bring words closer, evoking a quiet excitement as you trace them." Does this mean there's a qualitative difference between online words and printed words?

Fujiwara: For instance, when reading a long story, words conclude without connecting to others, sinking deeply within oneself. In contrast, online words are scattered and diffuse. If books are "wells," the internet is an "ocean." Wells are dug individually, one per person, while the ocean is a fused state where individual boundaries are unclear—the quality of words differs. Take e-books, for example. Books conceived and created solely from "internet language" will be entirely different from traditional "written language" books. I believe mobile phone novels were the beginning of this. Mobile phone novels were like real-life games; their meaning lay more in the sense of connection between the author and readers, and among readers themselves, than in the content. The value was in the connection between works of about 100 characters fitting on a mobile screen and the aftertaste they left.

In terms of form, I believe online language will become shorter. Recently, with the boom in proverbs and aphorisms, business books filled with nothing but someone's words are flooding the market. They extract these phrases out of context, interpret them in isolation, and give readers a vague sense of understanding. The key is that they're easy to read and self-contained within a small screen.

──Indeed, looking at Twitter, it seems people who post clever one-liners gain traction, while minor slips of the tongue can quickly ignite a firestorm. Both involve reacting to short bursts of language.

Fujiwara: In the future, such copy-like phrases might be valued as words in their own right. Masterpieces like Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment could become less acceptable. If I were a corporate manager, I'd tell my subordinates, "Every proposal must be summarized in 100 characters or less."

──Some argue that Twitter's strength lies precisely in its brevity and lightness. By stripping away excessive rhetoric and forcing people to state their opinions directly, it ultimately reveals their "true self."

Fujiwara: I don't feel Twitter reveals someone's true self. People adapt themselves to Twitter's world and rules before posting. Words meant for others are entirely different from words that go into your own well, like a diary. That's precisely why impersonation is possible on Twitter. I see Twitter as 99% a game played with words.

──Looking back through history, humanity's relationship with language has never been static. Socrates, for instance, viewed the written word as a harmful invention. For a long time afterward, reading aloud was the norm; the practice of silently reading written words, as we do now, doesn't have a long history.

Fujiwara: I agree. Back in the day, you'd even see old men reading books aloud in bookstores. That era ended less than 50 years ago. So I don't think the current form of books will last forever. Whether that's a good thing is another question.

──You also wrote, "The information society excels at processing and efficiently utilizing information, but conversely, linguistic sensibility and vocabulary seem to be shrinking." Does this mean linguistic sensibility itself is becoming impoverished?

Fujiwara: Take predictive text conversion software, for example. On a phone, typing "a" suggests "arigatou gozaimasu" (thank you very much). On computers, predictive conversion suggests the most frequently used words. This leads people to use socially aligned words rather than their own vocabulary.

Big data is also a hot topic in society. If this trend continues, self-expression will increasingly be based on the assumption that one's words are always open and public, potentially eroding the personal nature of language. While we may claim to use separate personal and public language, we might ultimately lose the ability to do so.

──It's often said that being connected to the internet makes it easy to get distracted. Does that hinder deep thought or creativity?

Fujiwara: The internet holds tremendous temptation. In the past, if you encountered something you didn't understand while writing, you had to go to the library. Now, you can search online and find the answer instantly. And then, before you know it, you end up looking at other unnecessary things. I'm not rejecting the internet, but I believe we should disconnect from it for a certain period of time. For an individual to create something, they need personal time and patience. Without that, thoughts become scattered, fragmented, and tend toward brevity.

──While being connected to the internet has its drawbacks, I think it also has the benefit of making research easier, as you mentioned.

Fujiwara: Wikipedia is a huge factor. It helps research new topics not covered in encyclopedias. Whether the information there is true is another matter, but since it provides everything, you inevitably end up using it.

Changing the subject slightly, when I consider what might disappear from society, I think libraries will be the first to go. You can look things up online, and eventually, everything will be available as e-books. Next would be schools. They could eventually shrink in scale. Textbooks will shift to tablets, so classes will be conducted online, and we might even see schools where students only attend once a week. In this way, it's not just language; the internet is changing the very landscape and spaces of society itself.

■ What will the evolution of input devices, which advanced publishing culture, create next?

 

──While online and digital have overlapping aspects, they are fundamentally different. For example, keyboard text input since the advent of word processors is a classic example of digitization, and you seem to view such digitization positively. Did you feel any discomfort when word processors first appeared?

Fujiwara: I found it incredibly fascinating. In the era of writing on paper, I used to cut and paste manuscript paper. With word processors, conversion and editing became easy. Even now, I edit long texts without starting from the first line. I think starting from the first line is a drawback of writing education. I was also thrilled that word processors could print. Seeing text become printed characters rather than handwriting felt fresh.

──I found it interesting in your book that typing on a keyboard makes "writer's high" more likely. Is that primarily because of the speed of input?

Fujiwara: Exactly. It's like runner's high. In fact, when typewriters became common in the US during the 19th century, the novel form rapidly developed. Then in Japan, with the advent of word processors and personal computers, the number of long novels increased.

──I see. So changes in input devices contributed to publishing culture. With mobile phone novels, since you write directly on the phone screen, some people apparently wrote while lying on riverbanks or burrowed under their futons. As new devices like wearables proliferate and voice input evolves, changing input methods, will language itself change too?

Fujiwara: I believe it will change. Both language and form evolve, so it's hard to imagine what it will become. Just like with mobile email, LINE, Twitter, and such, expressions that were once "spoken language" might circulate as "written language." This is something unprecedented.

──You also wrote, "With the internet's memory function, the very act of memorizing might come to be seen as a waste of time." Could this lead to weakened memory and, further, diminished thinking skills?

Fujiwara: For example, the advent of car navigation systems may have spoiled spatial awareness and other abilities, potentially leading to their decline. I think language is in the same situation, which is why we rely on search engines. The practice of copying entire conclusions from papers without permission is likely a result of this.

──On the other hand, some view the reduced need to memorize due to search as positive. They argue that time and effort previously spent on memorization are freed up, allowing that capacity to be directed toward more creative pursuits.

Fujiwara: We've heard similar arguments before, like how factory automation would free humans from monotonous tasks, enabling more creative work. But that hasn't materialized. The freedom from memorization has instead led to a freedom from thinking, which is why we have this copy-paste problem.

──Another view is that a new form of intelligence adapted to the current internet landscape will emerge. It suggests that a new kind of intelligence, one capable of rapidly scanning vast streams of information, will—or must—be born.

Fujiwara: I believe that since humans can't do this, we'll rely on software to accomplish it. I feel human thought resembles the card game "Concentration." That is, deep human thought and creativity begin by connecting memories that are separated. Therefore, if we no longer need to remember, that game breaks down. The world is currently heading in that direction. Memory is a bodily sensation. I question whether people can truly remember without bodily sensation. Perhaps someone exceptionally skilled at it will emerge, but for now, it's hard to say.

──However, it's true that new things, not just the internet, tend to be labeled harmful and dangerous in any era.

Fujiwara: True, movies and television were initially criticized that way too. But with the internet, I feel the impact is different. Movies and TV were novel in how they were received, but the internet involves mutual transmission and reception. We don't know how many books will remain in 100 years, but by then, books might no longer represent knowledge; they could become something like historical relics.

■ The Shifting Grounds of Authorship and Artistry in an Age of "Connection Supremacy"

 

──Some experts call our current era "connection supremacy." That is, there's a strong prevailing idea that connecting is good, and the more you connect, the better.

Fujiwara: Personally, I'm someone without online connections, but I do see some truth in this. However, I believe this is separate from the growth and development of the individual as an individual. Connection supremacy, taken to the extreme, doesn't demand individual growth. In the past, when faced with worries, people would think things through themselves, write in a diary, read books, and agonize over them. Now, you can consult online. Ultimately, humans must solve most problems themselves, but connecting might make it seem like a solution. However, if the strength between individuals when connected is weak, it might result in an inability to solve problems or create anything.

──Some argue that online connectivity accelerated social crises like the financial crisis.

Fujiwara: That's right. When we transitioned from an era where traders thought and analyzed based on their individual personalities to an era where it can be done easily with software, it's natural that there would be moments when everyone instantly flows in one direction. At that point, what decides victory or defeat is whether you have the fastest tools. In a sense, the era where individuals could make huge profits or losses based on their own discretion may be over. Even in the field of science, there's a debate that the era of individual discoveries and inventions has ended.

──You wrote, "Literature today, which is passed from the individual writer to the individual reader and finds its completion within the reader's thoughts, is fundamentally incompatible with the internet as a medium." Does this reflect a sense of crisis you feel as a novelist?

Fujiwara: Yes. Very few people read books on trains anymore, and the market is shrinking. While immersed in a book, you can't connect with anyone. That time spent reading, disconnected from others, might be unsettling in itself.

──During the PC communication era, there was also Tsutsui Yasutaka's "Morning Gaspard," an attempt to incorporate reader submissions into the work's world. I think the internet also holds potential to create new forms of novels and literature.

Fujiwara: There is potential. However, I don't believe it can produce a complete work. What I can imagine is a form of fluidity. Rather than possessing the artistic quality of a finished work like a paper book, in the future, something that changes shape over time might vaguely become a work in a broader sense. Whether it's the writer or the reader who changes it remains unclear. Regarding the Morning Gaspard project, I suspect Mr. Tsutsui was interested in literary experimentation. While pioneering, I don't think it yielded sustainable results.

──In music and film, digitization lowered barriers to production, and online distribution made sharing easier, leading to many new talents emerging. Do you think something similar will happen with novels?

Fujiwara: I don't think it's possible, at least not with physical books. What happens when all books become e-books is unknown, but so far, there are no successful examples.

──Mobile phone novels, which lowered the barrier to publishing works, could be seen as an example of this in a way.

Fujiwara: Mobile novels seemed to have artistic merit and authorial identity, but they didn't. They weren't created as something belonging to a single individual. Symbolic of this was the fact that the true identities of those authors were often unclear. It wasn't like traditional novels, where one person writes and hands it over. Also, most mobile novels didn't have a second installment. In other words, there was no desire to read that person's work. They were consumed as novel events and ended there, failing to cultivate authorial identity or artistic merit.

──So you're saying that while the internet increases the volume of content, the potential for authorship and artistic merit is steadily diminishing?

Fujiwara: Exactly. We might see more things created by undefined masses. Across all forms of expression, the potential for something belonging to a single individual is diminishing.

──I see. Incidentally, regarding authorship, American writer Stephen King reportedly tried to change his habits to ensure he had time disconnected from the internet. He said, "No one on their deathbed ever thinks, 'I wish I'd sent more instant messages.'" In any case, it seems we need to properly examine both the positive and negative aspects of networking and digitization. Thank you for today.